Symbiosis Center for Management & Human Resources
Development
[Constituent of SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED
UNIVERSITY), SI(DU)] (Established u/s 3 of the UGC Act 1956, by
notification No.F.9-12/2001 – U.3 of the Government of India)
MBA 2018-20 Sem-II
Learning and Development Project
Organizational Learning in Educational Institutes
By
Abhyudai Dwivedi (18020341006)
Deepali Samtani (18020341020)
Diksha Ravi (18020341070)
Maitrayee Kutum (18020341080)
Sonal (18020341100)
Pranay Mohta (18020341128)
Under the Guidance of
Dr. Netra Neelam
Objective
To understand the extent to which the LO concept is applicable to faculty and students of
educational institutions at the UG and PG level.
Introduction
A Learning organization is any organization that promotes and facilitates continuous learning.
Continuous learning atmosphere is required for any organization to survive and prosper in
uncertain business environment. Building a learning culture helps individuals to better adapt to
change and make informed decisions. A learning organization creates, captures, transfers and
mobilizes knowledge that helps in generating new ideas, innovation. An organization that
fosters continuous learning helps its employees or members to continuously expand their
capabilities thus feeling a sense of commitment to the organization. A learning organization
will always have a competitive advantage over others as it promotes free flow of ideas and
accepts constructive criticism and will be able to not survive but excel during change. A
learning organization always learns from its past and take it as a lesson, it doesn’t get bounded
by its past experiences thus it’s a key ingredient of any learning organization to look at the
managerial experiences that it processes. A learning organization promotes a fundamental shift
of mind which is required to execute decisions effectively through proper reflection of the
learned knowledge.
Peter Senge addressed five disciplines or characteristics that should be present to create a
learning organization:
1) Systems Thinking
2) Personal Mastery
3) Mental Models
4) Building Shared Vision
5) Team Learning
Systems Thinking involves collaborative learning culture which means understanding system
as a whole and in individual level also thus honouring different views and fostering an efficient
workplace. Personal mastery means developing a lifelong learning perspective and forward-
thinking mindset wherein they value and understand importance of continuous learning and
growth. Mental models deal with the shift in the fixed mindset and making a room for
innovation by new theories and approaches thus fitting into bigger picture. Building shared
vision includes forward-thinking leaders who focus on long term vision and are not hindered
by imposing the organizational goal because a learning organization tends to have a flat and
decentralized structure. Team learning involves better access to knowledge through open
communication, shared meaning, dialogues and discussion which helps in problem solving
quickly and efficiently thus making the employees learn and grow faster.
All the five characteristics of learning organization should be available to foster a learning
culture. Together these disciplines will help an organization to maintain innovation and remain
competitive, better handling of external pressures and change, improved quality of inputs and
better understanding of the objectives and vision of the organizational growth.
To build a learning culture at educational institutions, it is important that students should
actively get involved in learning new things and have interactions with the teachers/professors
to get conceptual clarity and build different perspectives to visualize a problem statement and
generate new ideas and ways to solve the problems rather than solving through traditional
methods. There should be open communication between the students and professors and
students should constantly be emphasized on understanding the importance of continuous
learning.
Literature Review
Learning organizations are organizations where individuals constantly improve their capacity
to accomplish the desired results. In such organisations, new thinking patterns are cultivated,
cooperative objectives are freed and everyone learns the art of learning together (Senge, 1990).
A recent explanation emphasized that organizational learning (Robelo & Gomes, 2011) is a
capacity or process within a particular organization that helps the organisation in acquiring,
accessing and revising organizational memory thereby giving way for organizational action
(Lin, 2008). While a research work concluded that learning oriented organizations searched for
ways of capturing learned notions to perform continually (Alipour, Khairuddin, & Karimi,
2011), a different study was of the view that team learning is an important part of developing
a learning organization (Norliya & Azizah, 2007). In addition to this, Norashikin and
Noormala (2006) proposed that learning in an organisation benefits in improving an
organization’s agility and change responsiveness and thereby helping them in gaining a
competitive advantage. The idea of developing a learning organization has been directly linked
to the level of performance and innovation in organizations (Power & Waddell, 2004; Watkins
& Marsick, 1993; 1999).
Kalsom and Ching (2011) thus, emphasized that for educational institutes striving for academic
excellence, it is of utmost significance that they become learning organizations. This in turn
will take care of their objective of attaining academic excellence among its students.
Transforming into learning organisations will also help these institutes to improve their overall
level of innovation and performance. Various studies indicated that learning organization have
strong relationship with organizational performance (Dunphy & Griffths, 1998; Khandekar &
Sharma, 2006; Robinson, Clemson, & Keating, 1997; Ho, 2011; Akhtar et al., 2012) whereby
learning organization is represented by seven dimensions developed by Watkins and Marsick
(1993). This was attributed to the parallel improvement of performance of organization and
change, subsequently leading to improved organizational performance.
Furthermore, organizations that learn also experience improvement in performance because the
trade of helpful knowledge occurs. This is because in a learning organization, there is a
continuous and harmonious learning environment (Akhtar, Arif, Rubi, & Naveed, 2012). It is
becoming increasingly important for organizations to adopt the learning orientation as it could
help contribute to organizational success. However, as the capability to learn does not naturally
and readily occur within organizations, it is imperative that organizations ensure that resources
allocated and efforts made to instil learning within organizations.
Levels of organisational learning:
In every organisation, there are basically three levels of organisational learning:
The Individual Level: Learning at the individual level entails getting a person cumulative or
new ideas and information belonging to his environment, understanding them, interpreting and
experimenting them and then, adjusting his behaviour in terms of obtained results using
conceptual and cognitive processes. According to Hollingshead, specialisation and distribution
of knowledge among organisational members create barriers for them to effectively identify,
retrieve and transfer knowledge when in need.
The Group Level: When individuals share and interact with other individuals what they have
learnt at the individual level, it becomes group level learning. Here, individual share their
learning with another individual, interprets together, and obtains a group assumption. The
essence here is on communication. Reagans, et al. studied group learning by examining joint-
replacement surgery in teaching hospitals. They concluded that "increased experience working
together in a team promoted better coordination and teamwork.
The Organisational level: When groups come together to share their knowledge they have
acquired through the process of communication, these learning are now transformed into an
acceptable instruction for all organisational members and will be made accessible to everyone
who needs them.
Methodology
The research project’s objective was to understand the learning styles in various colleges across
the country. This study is pertinent to faculties and students. The approach followed was to
select some undergraduate colleges and perform a quantitative research. The Undergraduate
Colleges selected were:
Master School of Management, Meerut
Amity University, Lucknow
Invertis Institute of Management Studies, Bareilly
Data Collection
A Google Questionnaire was prepared to be circulated to the students and the faculties. The
questions were framed using the Funnel approach, where more open-ended questions were put
at the beginning and more specific questions were put at the bottom end of the questionnaire.
44 questions were sent to the faculties and 25 questions were sent to the students to understand
the quality of learning styles followed in various institutions.
Questions sent to the Faculties:
1. Learning and teaching processes are oriented towards realizing the vision
2. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving all faculty
3. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving feedback of student
4. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving feedback of parent
5. Vision ideation is the outcome of a process involving the external community
6. All faculty engage in continuous professional learning
7. New faculty receive induction and mentoring support
8. Professional learning is focused on teaching pedagogy and area of specialization
9. Faculty have autonomy for setting up aims and priorities for their own professional
learning
10. Professional learning process instils creative and innovative thinking
11. Professional learning is a balanced mix of on the job learning/mentoring and external
expertise
12. Professional learning is based on student feedback and past performance
13. Time and financial support are provided to promote professional learning
14. Faculty get scope of working and learning as a team
15. Teaching and learning process give enough scope for face-to-face interaction as well as
use of ICT
16. There is mutual trust and respect among faculty
17. Faculty reflect together on how to make their own learning more powerful
18. The institute allocates time and other resources for collaborative working and collective
learning
19. Faculty are encouraged to experiment and innovate in their practice
20. The institute recognizes faculty for taking academic initiatives
21. Faculty engage in continuous research & consultancy for enhancing teaching and learning
experience, knowledge generation and innovation
22. Faculty engage in experimenting and doing things differently
23. Problems and mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning
24. Students are actively engaged in research
25. Systems are in place to examine process of continuous improvement
26. Institutional best practices are made available to all faculty
27. Sufficient research databases and statistical software are available for supporting research
28. There are institutional forums for exchange of knowledge and research ideas
29. Faculty have the capacity and opportunities for engaging in continuous improvement of
curriculum and teaching and learning process
30. The institute has a system in place for benchmarking, assessing and updating academic
process
31. The institute continuously engages in review and assessment of mission, learning goals
and outcomes
32. The institute is flexible to respond quickly to challenges and opportunities of external
environment
33. The institute collaborates with industry experts for curriculum development, research and
teaching and learning process
34. The institute collaborates and interacts with local community as partners in the education
process and the organisation of the school
35. Faculty collaborate, learn and exchange knowledge with peers from other institutes
36. The institute has faculty and student exchange programs for learning and research
37. ICT tools such as MOODLE is widely used to facilitate communication, knowledge
exchange and collaboration with the external environment
38. The institute encourages leadership development among faculty, non-teaching staff and
students
39. Institute leaders are proactive and creative change agents
40. The institute has a culture and well defined structure to facilitate professional dialogue,
collaboration and knowledge exchange
41. Institute leaders ensure that the organisation’s actions are consistent with its
vision, missions goals and values
42. Institute leaders encourage continuous learning, research and innovation
43. Institute leaders promote collaboration with other institutes, the community, higher
education institutions and industry partners
44. School leaders promote experiential learning
Questions sent to the Students:
1. Engaged in active learning outside of classroom settings
2. Engaged in active learning in classroom settings
3. Encouraged to participate in classroom discussions
4. Encouraged to participate in self-reflection activities
5. Engaged in positive interactions with faculty
6. Was led to re-think my views of myself and others
7. Encouraged to consider different perspectives and points of view
8. Had influential interaction with peers
9. Encouraged to consider issues related to social justice and diversity
The next 16 questions focussed on the individualistic style of learning and the importance
they attach to self-directed learning:
1. I prefer to have others plan my learning
2. I prefer problems for which there is only one solution
3. I can deal with the unexpected and solve problems as they arise
4. I feel uncomfortable under conditions of uncertainty
5. I am able to impose meaning upon what others see as disorder
6. I seldom think about my own learning and how to improve it
7. I feel I am a self-directed learner
8. I feel others are in a better position than I am to evaluate my success as a student
9. I love learning for its own sake
10. I try to relate academic learning to practical issues
11. I often find it difficult to locate information when I need it
12. When I approach new material, I try to relate it to what I already know
13. It is my responsibility to make sense of what I learn at college
14. When I learn something new, I try to focus on the details rather than on the big picture
15. I use mobile phones in accessing to new information
16. I am able to professionally benefit from social utility websites such as Facebook, Twitter
etc.
The students and the faculties had to record their responses on a 7-point Likert scale which
represented:
1-Strongly Disagree
2-Disagree
3-Somewhat Disagree
4- Neither Disagree nor Agree
5-Somewhat Agree
6-Agree
7-Strongly Agree
Once the google questionnaire was sent, students and faculties were also contacted via Social
Media Platforms like LinkedIn and mails were also sent to get the responses timely.
Analysis and Interpretation
After getting the responses, the information was analysed to get some meaningful result for the
research. The responses file was imported in SPSS and Factor Analysis was performed on the
data.
Factor Analysis Method was chosen to group the similar learning responses together and to
better comprehend and segregate the specific learning methodology used in the various
institutions.
Method Used: Principal Component Method with Varimax Rotation
Analysis:
1. Student Responses:
Through the results of Factor Analysis, it was found that eight (8) components were extracted
from the responses. The responses could be grouped into 8 separate components and each
component was independent of each other. This finding was based on the Eigen Values
generated in the output table.
Eigenvalue: The amount of variance that each component/factor explains is known as the
eigenvalue of that component/factor. Eigen Value should be >1 to form a separate
Component/Factor.
To find out the correlation between the responses and the components and how strong is the
impact of the responses, we analysed the Rotated Component Matrix in SPSS, which gives
the simple correlation of each response with the particular component.
Similar responses are grouped in the 1st Factor - Students in this component actively engaged
in learning and have a fruitful interaction with their peers.
Similar responses are grouped in the 2nd Factor - Students in this component tried to relate to
the information and considered it their responsibility to understand the key takeaways from the
subjects taught at the institutions.
Similar responses are grouped in the 3rd Factor - Students in this component tried to relate to
solve the problems and issues on their own with the help of self-directed learning.
Similar responses are grouped in the 4th Factor - Students in this component dealt with
uncertainty in cases where they were not given sufficient information for a task to be
completed.
Similar responses are grouped in the 5th Factor - Students in this component preferred a
traditional method of learning and were generally dependent on others to plan things for them.
Similar responses are grouped in the 6th Factor - Students in this component did not think of
ways to improve themselves.
Similar responses are grouped in the 7th Factor - Students in this component could solve
problems by themselves and would inherently learn to comprehend and understand the subject
matter at hand.
Similar responses are grouped in the 8th Factor - Students in this component have a
meaningful discussion with their peers to get conceptual clarity and different thinking
perspective.
2. Faculty Responses:
We got 1 response from the faculty of Invertis Institute of Management, Bareilly and these
were the observations:
The institute follows a methodology to instil a culture of collective learning and constantly
strive to achieve the vision for the institute. The various practices followed are:
Pros:
1. Feedback of students is taken on a regular basis to improve the current practices.
2. Faculties have freedom to take courses for personal development.
3. Innovation and Creative thinking are encouraged.
4. Time and financial support are provided to all faculties interested in learning and
improving themselves.
5. Faculties’ efforts are recognised.
6. Sufficient Support (in terms of updated software) is provided to students for engaging
in research.
7. Focus is on continuous improvement providing leadership development programs
where faculties can become the change agents.
8. Impetus is given on experiential learning.
Cons:
1. Feedback from parents and external community is not taken into consideration
vigorously
2. No presence of forums to exchange ideas and enhance learning experience
Findings
The institutes foster an environment of collaboration and knowledge sharing among students.
They often engage in self-directed learning and are open to solving issues independently.
They are willing to experiment but deal with uncertainty in cases where they are not given
sufficient information for a task to be completed. Moreover, some students are more
comfortable in keeping themselves restricted to their comfort zone and depend on others to
plan things for them.
The institutes also embrace change and innovation. Pedagogies and practices equip the
students with the skills for success. They place learning at the centre. There is a practice of
continuous feedback which enables the institutes to take into account the opinions of students
and take necessary steps. The faculties are given the opportunity to experiment and learn
from their mistakes. Personal and Leadership Development Programs along with financial
support are encouraged for faculties to recognise their quality efforts and ensure their
growth.
Suggestions
Institutes can adopt the following recommendations:
• Develop shared mission/vision to enhance the learning experience and outcomes of all
students by inviting students, parents and other partners to contribute.
• A continuous feedback mechanism can be developed on the basis of on campus education
and research which shall help the institutes in providing a holistic learning environment that
focus not only gaining knowledge but also on developing skills like communication, problem
solving, flexibility as well as analytical abilities.
• Encourage cross functional teams.
• Incorporate feedback from parents and external faculty.
• Develop online forums to exchange ideas and opinions.
• Organise seminars and conferences to facilitate peer learning among faculties.
• A good system should be in place to examine progress and gaps between current and
expected impact.
• Staff should have the capacity to analyse and use multiple sources of data for feedback.
Conclusion
The findings from the study provide valuable insights on the extent to which the concepts of a
learning organisations are applicable to the faculties and students of Under Graduate level
educational institutions. It also gives a fair idea on existing practices in some of the educational
institutes in Uttar Pradesh.
The report shows both, the faculty and the student perspective with respect to the applicability
of learning organisation concepts. It highlights both the positive and negative practices and
provides recommendations which the institutes can adopt in order to further improve their
practices. Future studies can be carried out with a more meticulous
questionnaire and by taking into consideration a wider pool of respondent. Such studies will
not only help the institutes in identifying various gaps in their method of operation but will also
create a positive learning environment for the students.
References
1. Alipour, F., Khairuddin Idris, & Karimi, R. (2011). Knowledge creation and transfer: role
of learning organization. International Journal of Business Administration, 2(3), 61-67.
2. Akhtar, S., Arif, A., Rubi, E., & Naveed, S. (2011). Impact of Organizational Learning on
Organizational Performance: Study of Higher Education Institutes. International Journal of
Academic Research, 3(5), 327-331.
3. Armstrong, A. & Foley, P. (2003). Foundations of a learning organization: Organization
learning mechanism. Learning Organization, 10, 74-82. Burgelman, R. A., Christensen, C.
4. M., & Wheelwright, S. C. (2009). Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation.
New York City, New York: McGraw-Hill.
5. Victoria Konidari, Yvan Abernot, (2006) "From TQM to learning organisation: Another way
for quality management in educational institutions", International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 23 Issue: 1, pp.8-26
6. Garvin, (1993) “Building a learning organization”, Harvard Business Review, 71 (4) (1993),
pp. 78-91
